After the debate, the Republican political action committee America Rising promoted the narrative that Sanders won the debate. “Clinton needed a win last night. Instead, everyone is talking about how well Bernie Sanders, her chief rival, did,” spokesman Jeff Bechdel wrote to reporters. Meanwhile, American Crossroads, a group co-founded by Karl Rove, is airing an ad in Iowa bolstering a core tenet of Sanders’s case against Clinton .... These Republican operatives are attempting to pick their Democratic opponent in the general election, and they’re making clear they’d rather face Sanders than Clinton.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:How can Sanders not have found at least one Senator who will endorse him??? http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-endorsement-primary/
Pretty simple: he was not seen as the ultimate nominee and those in Congress do not want to take a chance and endorse him thereby offending the Clintons if she does end up winning the nomination and the general. The Clintons are known to have a long memory and don't forgive those who go against them.
Or rather, he has never compromised on any issue and therefore doesn't have any political allies. A man who sticks to his morals is great. Unless is it directly hampers his ability to forge partnerships and get things done.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:How can Sanders not have found at least one Senator who will endorse him??? http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-endorsement-primary/
Pretty simple: he was not seen as the ultimate nominee and those in Congress do not want to take a chance and endorse him thereby offending the Clintons if she does end up winning the nomination and the general. The Clintons are known to have a long memory and don't forgive those who go against them.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:How can Sanders not have found at least one Senator who will endorse him??? http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-endorsement-primary/
Pretty simple: he was not seen as the ultimate nominee and those in Congress do not want to take a chance and endorse him thereby offending the Clintons if she does end up winning the nomination and the general. The Clintons are known to have a long memory and don't forgive those who go against them.
Or rather, he has never compromised on any issue and therefore doesn't have any political allies. A man who sticks to his morals is great. Unless is it directly hampers his ability to forge partnerships and get things done.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Clinton is a moderate reformer, which is exactly what the country needs. Sanders proposals are fantasies that are much too expensive and so poorly designed they would fail if enacted. As with the GOP leaders, scapegoating a few groups of people or interest groups is not a legitimate platform.
Clinton would be a divider. This is NOT what our country needs right now.
She views the Republicans as her enemy. She is not someone who instills a sense of patriotism or confidence in voters.
And Bernie is a uniter? Don't make me laugh. How many bipartisan bills has he seen through during his tenure?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:How can Sanders not have found at least one Senator who will endorse him??? http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-endorsement-primary/
Pretty simple: he was not seen as the ultimate nominee and those in Congress do not want to take a chance and endorse him thereby offending the Clintons if she does end up winning the nomination and the general. The Clintons are known to have a long memory and don't forgive those who go against them.
Anonymous wrote:How can Sanders not have found at least one Senator who will endorse him??? http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-endorsement-primary/
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Clinton is a moderate reformer, which is exactly what the country needs. Sanders proposals are fantasies that are much too expensive and so poorly designed they would fail if enacted. As with the GOP leaders, scapegoating a few groups of people or interest groups is not a legitimate platform.
Clinton would be a divider. This is NOT what our country needs right now.
She views the Republicans as her enemy. She is not someone who instills a sense of patriotism or confidence in voters.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: Single-payer Medicare-for-All is actually quite fiscally conservative at its core because it is a measure that would save us millions in healthcare expenditures in the long-term. The ACA was supposed to be the stepping stone to prep America for what nationalized healthcare would look like. I think Sanders has it right.
What will happen to all the health insurance companies and their employees?
Do we still have switchboard operators? No.
We didn't get out of the stone age because we ran out of stone. It would not be the crisis that you want to make it out to be.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: Single-payer Medicare-for-All is actually quite fiscally conservative at its core because it is a measure that would save us millions in healthcare expenditures in the long-term. The ACA was supposed to be the stepping stone to prep America for what nationalized healthcare would look like. I think Sanders has it right.
What will happen to all the health insurance companies and their employees?
Anonymous wrote: Single-payer Medicare-for-All is actually quite fiscally conservative at its core because it is a measure that would save us millions in healthcare expenditures in the long-term. The ACA was supposed to be the stepping stone to prep America for what nationalized healthcare would look like. I think Sanders has it right.
Anonymous wrote:Robert Reich writes he has reviewed BS's overall plan, and it is sound and a huge improvement over what is currently and what was before in place.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm an American with German, French, and Canadian family, by marriage and extended. Many immigrants to these countries from elsewhere, so came to these nations from elsewhere (about half from oppressive communist countries). Guess what. They're doing well. Health care, child care, family leave, wages, education... They thrived. I received sad looks of condolence when I returned to work after 9 weeks post c section after baby 1, and considered quitting work after baby 2. My description of our college savings plans were met with gasps: HOW much does university cost??? When foreign grandparents got cancers or heart disease, their health care was covered, period. How bad is that life? Not bad at all...
Are you familiar with Medicare? The elderly are covered here too and have been for decades.
No exactly. I still work and pay $503 a month for Medicare, $2,023 a year or supplemental coverage and $53.00 monthly for drug coverage. My doctor will not accept Medicare, so I pay him out of pocket. How is this free?